Solving the Equation for Trace: Gamma Matrices Explained

Fr34k
Messages
19
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Solve the equation. What is it's trace?

Homework Equations


[STRIKE]k[/STRIKE] γμ γ5 [STRIKE]o[/STRIKE] γ\nu γ5

The Attempt at a Solution


I don't think this is reduced enough.
γμkμγ5γ\nuo\nuγ\nuγ5

trace: just got rid of gamma5 with anticommutation.
-Tr[γμkμγ\nuo\nuγ\nu]
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Fr34k said:

Homework Statement


Solve the equation. What is it's trace?

Homework Equations


[STRIKE]k[/STRIKE] γμ γ5 [STRIKE]o[/STRIKE] γ\nu γ5

You haven't posted an equation, you've posted an expression. You can't solve an expression.

The Attempt at a Solution


I don't think this is reduced enough.
γμkμγ5γ\nuo\nuγ\nuγ5

I see the same index, \nu, 3 times in this term, so it is not valid according to the rules of the Einstein summation convention.
 
My bad, you re right it is an expression. I should have said evaluate the expression or simplify or something similar.

As for index \nu. Doesn't [STRIKE]o[/STRIKE] =γ\nuo?
Would really appreciate some help here.
 
Fr34k said:
My bad, you re right it is an expression. I should have said evaluate the expression or simplify or something similar.

So the problem is to simplify the expression [strike]k[/strike] γμ γ5 [strike]o[/strike] γν γ5, and then find the trace? If so, are you given a particular space-time and metric (or Lagrangian)? Are k_{\nu} and o_{\nu} arbitrary vectors, or do they have some meaning here?

As for index \nu. Doesn't [STRIKE]o[/STRIKE] =γ\nuo?
Would really appreciate some help here.

Do you mean {\not}{o}=\gamma^{\nu}o_{\nu}, where o_{\nu} is some covariant vector in your spacetime? If so, then realize that there is an implied summation over the index \nu in the term \gamma^{\nu}o_{\nu}, according to the Einstein summation convention. This makes the \nu in this term a so-called "dummy" index which can be replaced with any other Greek index.

When you have something like {\not}{k}{\not}{o} and you want to write it in terms of the Dirac matrices and the covariant vectors, according to the Einstein summation convention, you should use a different index for each implied sum, so that it is clear which terms belong to which summation. For example, {\not}{k}{\not}{o}=\gamma^{\nu}k_{\nu}\gamma^{\nu}o_{\nu} is meaningless and incorrect, but {\not}{k}{\not}{o}=\gamma^{\mu}k_{\mu}\gamma^{\nu}o_{\nu} is correct and consistent with the Einstein summation convention. Likewise, you wouldn't write \gamma_{\nu}{\not}{k}=\gamma_{\nu} \gamma^{\nu} k_{\nu}, but rather you would use a dummy index that is not already used in the term like \mu, and write \gamma_{\nu}{\not}{k}=\gamma_{\nu} \gamma^{\mu} k_{\mu}

Now, that said, if this sort of index notation is not immediately clear to you, you should almost certainly brush up on your mathematics before trying to study spinors and Dirac matrices.
 
Last edited:
kγ and oν are just arbitrary vectors.

I think I kinda get this notation now.

As for mathematics behind I couldn't agree more. The problem is we (the students) first saw this kind of notation when actually studying scattering of Dirac particles and didn't really get much (or any) of the math behind it.

But thank you for clearing things out a bit.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top